It seems to me, this whole debate over the immigration crisis hinges on one word - “wall”. The current impasse between Trump and the Congressional leaders is the building of his wall. How do we get over this sticking point?
Here is my proposal.
President Trump should compromise and call this bill “border security” and not even mention the wall at all. This way, it makes the target of better border security the goal. It is generic and broad and a sweeping term which can cover whatever he deemed necessary. When it is presented that way to Congress, who can be against it?
Once the bill is passed, he can do what he wants...like building a wall, or increase surveillance or increase border guards or use of drones...
Do you see what I mean?
This also gives the democrat leadership a way out. They can give Trump the 6 billion dollars he ask for and not be hung up on the wall.
The government can reopen and end this shut down.
For example, it is exactly like saying we want to inprove the nations “infrastructure” bill which was close to 900 billion dollars under the previous administration.
The details was not spelled out. It could mean better highways, repair bridges, build new bridges, and airports and docks and a host of other projects all lumped into one.
What do you think?
Any other ideas to break the impasse?
Yes, he could simply lie about the use of the money as it would be normal for him, Of course, everyone would know it was a lie which you guys are okay with.
Mitch needs to let the bills reopening the govt go for a vote and then we would see which senators want to keep it closed. Blame him why don't you?
Did you complaint when Obama lied to pass the ACA bill? Remember “you csn keep your Dr. if you like your Dr.” ?
Did he say Mexico would pay for the wall? I can give you ten Trump lies to every one of Obama's but you wouldn't learn a thing from it, Jack.
I did keep my doctor. So did everyone else I know.
In all honesty, Jack, I think that Trump should declare a national emergency, get his funding for his wall, and then government will get re-opened. From his perspective, that's what I think he should do. There's precedent for him to do that, so go ahead. Then he can declare victory and keep his promise to his base.
Here's a question though - why is he dealing with wall funding now? He had control of the House and the Senate. Why did he not get the wall passed before November?
And he can set a precedent for the next Democratic president to do the same thing with climate change, Crank. He can declare a fake national crisis--in that case it may actually be a real crisis--and the Republicans cannot fight it. Dumb move on Trump's part!
I'm not sure it makes much difference. How much money have we already spent building border fences and walls and on border security? Presidents use executive power all the time - the Iraq War, for instance - nobody cares. Go ahead, build your wall.
Ideally, he should work with Congress to come to some compromise, but barring that, why not just move forward the way he wants? I'm more interested in seeing government re-opened at this point.
And why shut the government down over this? Why try to pass wall funding now? Why didn't he do this when he had control of Congress? Does he really want a wall or does he just want to play games? This seems more like a political strategy than an actual need.
Trump's pride is worth more to him than those out of work, and as you point out, he couldn't do it with both houses so why does he think he could do it with one? Boggles the mind!
I have something that's been bothering me and I'm just going to say it.
You look like a Republican. I'm sorry to say, and this is my own bias speaking, but if I saw you on the street, I'd assume you voted for Trump. I'm really sorry to say that.
Have you been discriminated against much because of this?
I grew up in the factory suburbs of Cleveland. Plenty of people who look like Randy were Democrats. They also were mainly union workers.
What?? Explain yourself Crank! I resent that remark!!
Ha! I was waiting for that Randy. You just don't look "enlightened" enough to be a Democrat.
Wait, before you respond, let me get up off the floor and catch my breath.
I bet you have a couple dogs and a 4-wheel drive truck too! OMG! I can't stop myself.
But really, you do have a closet full of plaid shirts and tasseled loafers don't you?
This is too easy. Com'on bud, tell the truth, that picture is really your brother isn't it?
Wait, wait, I got more ...
Just my bias speaking, really. You look tough, military-like. If I saw you crossing the street, I'd think Republican.
That said, I live in a town of liberal wussies.
Strangely, I have a very conservative friend. He thinks Republicans are wussies and I think liberals are wussies. It's a very interesting conversation.
It was Paul Ryan who stopped it. He was the Speaker and he was the one that sets the agenda. Remember in the beginning, he also worked on the repeal of the ACA and we knew how that turned out...
Paul Ryan is a RINO.
The simplest solution is for Congress and the President to stop posturing like spoiled brats and do what we pay them to do. Find compromise which serves the best interests of all the people.
What's the old line? 'You can't always get what you want, but if you try real hard you might just get what you need.'
Impossible to find a compromise that "serves the best interests of all the people", for the two disagree on just what those interests are or how to achieve them.
But that's how compromise works: you don't get all that you want, and the "interests of the people" suffer some as a result...but not as much as they would if it went totally against your opinion.
But compromise has not been offered; indeed one side has stated loud and clear, several times, that there will be NO compromise. That the end decision will be exclusively theirs.
I personally do not believe that that is what we pay them to do.
Did you pay Trump to own the shutdown, Dan? Or did you pay him to keep the promise of Mexico paying for the wall? Did you really believe Mexico would pay for the wall?
Did you pay Pelosi to refuse any sort of compromise? How much did you give her? What is the cost of buying a Democrat now? Were you ever, not ignorant enough, but stupid enough to think Mexico would write a check for the wall?
Still not answering plain questions, eh Dan. I don't blame you though. Since I do not want to appear as you do I'll answer your queries.
Yes, apparently she's paid by our taxes so I suppose I indirectly pay her to represent me. The cost of buying a Democrat is whatever her salary is, like your idol Trump.
No, knowing Trump's past lawsuits, vulgarities. and especially his distaste for the truth, I would never believe anything he promised to do except cozy up to Putin. See how easy that was, Dan?
You said that one side has stated there will be no compromise.... what compromise has the other side offered? Genuine question.
One side has not offered anything. One side has offered only a complete refusal to compromise.
Which one seems better to YOU? The silent one or the one making it very plain it is 100% their way with no compromise possible?
I wouldn’t say either of those are “better”. If neither side is offering a compromise to help reach a solution then neither is being productive. Does it really matter in which fashion they each refuse to compromise?
One side has offered only a complete refusal to compromise.
This side? Or this is the silent one?
"If we don't get what we want, one way or another, whether is through you, through the military, anything you want to call, I will shut down the government."
Actually, there was a bipartisan compromise that Trump rejected. It included $25 billion for border security.
https://www.wtsp.com/article/news/natio … -519361171
Yes, I see your point, Jack. Because everyone knows the President's intent, though, (and because he wants it that way), even "border security" will bring up images of a "wall." There must be a reason for the impasse, and I don't believe it's financial.
Being only a second generation American, I know my great-grandfather came here before the term "illegal immigrant" was ever created. Lumbering companies were hiring. Men in Finland were apt to be drafted by the Russian military. At the time, that was the choice for my great-grandfather. So, even though it meant giving up land inheritance as the eldest son, my great-grandfather chose coming to a new land where opportunity was calling. This is only one example of why people come to the United States--opportunity. The spirit that moves people should not be denied. It's made our country great.
Like the law of tithe, I believe one-tenth (10%) of our nantional budget should be used as a kind of charity, both for those below poverty level in America and for immigrants, whether this charity be educational, provisional, or medical. Yes, if it seems we need more than 10%, we have a problem. Then, private organizations have to take up the gap. Private efforts should be the first cause, anyway--not the government.
I'm barely touching the subject, and I realize it.
As I have said before, I don't like the idea of a wall. The sight creates reflections back to Berlin and even the Great Wall of China. What are these walls based upon? Partly fear, partly control. While some control may be necessary, especially for our southern borders, it seems, the fear element is very negative and should have no place in the decision-making process. So, I believe, there is the catch.
If the wall is really necessary, a stipulation to how long this wall will remain should be put into the equation. The United States, then, would in effect be saying, "We need a time out--we love you people, but we have to catch up to restructure." How long should the wall last? I would say not more than two generations (about 40 years tops).
Legal immigration and international programs with Mexico, of course, need to continue.
Time heals all wounds, they say. For those deeply affected by undocumented immigration, I would say, "Have patience. The situation will pass. It will take time, but we are looking forward to a better tomorrow."
I understand your sentiment. I come from a family of immigrants. There are members of my extended family that also came here illegally but though not undocumented. They were called paper sons...using false birth certificates...
I am sympathetic to those who wants to come here and better their economic situations...I don’t fault them for that.
My problem is with our current situation which has been growing for the last 30 years...
As Milton Friedman states so succinctly...”you can have open borders or you can have a welfare state but you can’t have both”.
That is where we are now in 2019.
We have developed all these benefits like food stamp and assisted housing and medicaid and child care and disability and all of which was designed to help our citizens... less fortunate. Not for all...unfortunately, some of these programs are being abused by immigrants who tap into these benefits... I know it happens and I know it both first hand and via 2nd hand stories...
Our country is wealthy and generous but there is a limit to that generosity.
At a time when we run up a debt of 22 trillion dollars, how long do you think we can sustain this growing burden?
I thought you were fine with the trillion and a half tax breaks for the rich, Jack. You do realize it added 10% to the deficit, or do you?
It is not tax break for the rich...I don’t consider my self rich and I am getting approx. $2000 reduction on my taxes in 2018. If I get it, many other people also qualify, I am middle class. The tax reform was also to stimulate the economy and raise revenue to the treasury... which it did. Look it up?
We have generated record revenue for our country...but we also increased our spending which contributed to the debt...
I have voiced my disagreement with the deficit spending...numerous times and warn of the pending disaster.
When the rich pay less money than the average into the tax coffers of the country you have a complaint. Until then all you have is greed, a demand that others give more than you do.
If people do not want to be taxed more than the common person, they don't need to be rich. When so few people control 90% of the money they should pay for the privilege of doing so.
Oh Randy. Are you saying the opportunity to earn more money than the 'average Joe' is a privilege?
Sure it is, GA. Trump inherited his wealth as do many others. Are you stating being born into wealth is a privilege the Average Joe possesses?
That is one segment Randy, what about the others? The Bill Gates or Jeff Bezos, or Warren Buffets, or Sam Waltons, or Jobs, Waynes, or Wozniaks ...?
Or any of our upper-middle class folks that have worked hard to have more income than the median income 'average Joe' earns. Are they born with privilege too?
Are they privileged to work their butts off for their above "average Joe" income?
I feel those who have achieved vast wealth should realize they're taking needed earnings from the common people. They aren't in need of excesses. If the rules of capitalism were equitable, it would be this way. Patriotic, in a sense.
I have to let this one go Randy. "..taking needed income from the common people"?
You start that thread bud, if you are a glutton for punishment.
After talking to you, (on the phone - which was cool - imagine if Crankalicious heard the southern accent that went with the picture)), and understanding your country roots, I can't reconcile that statement. But I would be glad to discuss how crazy I think it is.
I personally believe Trump wants this shut down to continue as long as possible to impede all the criminal investigations and civil lawsuits against him.
Yes, it's a classic diversion move to invent a crisis and distract the country from the Russian investigations.
Not many people seem to notice the new bombshell that Trump has had secret talks with Putin without any aides in the room and in one case took away his translator's notes.
Okay, okay, so, like I know this was complied and edited for a specific purpose...
And, like, I know everyone is talking about compromise..
But here Chuck Schemer channels Pres. Trump on more than a few points.
"We know that keeping our borders safe from dangerous gangs, drug dealers, and human traffickers is critical" (he did leave out the disease and rapists part)
"... we let cross the border the millions who take jobs away from American workers."
"... we stop them at the border, turn them around and push them back home."
"...when we catch someone crossing the border, prosecute them, and deport them, we are solving the crime and punishing the criminal"
"...we appropriate 6.5 Billions dollars, upfront, in this bill to bolster our security efforts. ... as if these 6.5 Billion dollars do not count"
Now, I am not a BIG Wall supporter. (I can see some new fencing as probably helpful), and I am not trying to validate either man's claims. I just thought this would give ya'll a grin, or grimace, depending on your perspective. For me it was a chuckle.
(just click the image to give it a look)
GA, I couldn't find the date of this video?
It's old Randy, but not ancient. It was during the time of the 'Gang of 8' bill, 2013 I think, when Pres. Obama was in office. Does that matter?
It may matter, GA. How much has been spent on the wall/fence since then could have a bearing on the issue now. And how much is already earmarked for maintenance and construction and hasn't been used would also be pertinent.
What about the points mentioned Randy? Nothing was said about the wall. (although Schumer did make a reference to 630 miles of fencing in the video they, (the Democrats), have funded)
Put the fence aside for a minute and look at the comments posted. How are they different from Pres. Trump's statements, (except for the disease and rapists part already noted)?
But are you contending much hasn't already been ceded since that time?
I would have to think about that Randy. My first thoughts don't recall any concessions.
But, I wasn't picking a side when I posted that video. I was just pointing out the similarities between Schumer's statements and Trump's.
It is sort of the same point Wilderness repeatedly makes. Both sides are full of stuff. Schemer's comments - then - were in support of his party's president, but now with a different president, he doesn't hold the same views? What changed?
Well I seem to remember Democrats voting for funding of certain parts of a barrier in the past. And there's money already earmarked for wall construction and other security not being used. I just wondered where it came from.
You will have to keep wondering Randy. I don't support Pres. Trump's version of the concrete wall, (yes, I know that has changed now), so I don't have a ready answer.
And since I don't support that position, I don't have a partisan answer either.
But... I will say that my impression is that this is all about politics and not about the substance of the argument. On both sides of the aisle.
However, even though I disagree with the sincerity of the Democrat effort, I would not want to see thim completely give-in to Pres. Trump's demand. I want to see a compromise, and the results of that compromise are less important, to me, than the fact there there is a compromise.
And you'll probably agree, it would be a mistake for Trump to declare a National Crisis to build his wall, as this would set a precedent for future presidents to do the same just to get their way.
Both sides are playing politics, no doubt about it. However, in this particular instance, the Democrats have the better position. The wall really is an unnecessary, ineffective waste of money that could be better spent on smart border security. If it were politically expedient for the Democrats to fund the wall, they probably would. That wouldn't, however, change the fact that funding Trump's wall is nothing more than a waste of billions of dollars to appease Trump's ego. He was ready to sign the funding bill until he heard that Rush/Sean/Ann were upset.
Under the current circumstances, it makes no sense for the Dems to do anything more than what they and the Republicans already agreed on and voted for. The only hold up here is Trump. He owns this shutdown.
Of course the dems would fund the wall if it were politically expedient; it they gained power or money from a political move. It's what they are on the Hill for, after all; to build political power and fatten their wallets.
And that's also why they refuse to build it; because it isn't politically expedient, because it won't help build their power or fatten their pocketbook.
It has zero to do with whether a wall will help (it most certainly will), whether it is needed (it is) or anything else. The refusal is 100% about denying Trump anything he asks for, good or bad, right or wrong, useful or a waste; whatever he wants shall be refused.
In this case, the politically expedient position for the Democrats is also the right position for the country. The majority of Americans do not want the wall; the president has offered no convincing argument for why it would work; and the Republicans and Democrats already came to a funding agreement which Trump declared he would not sign. Trump is on the wrong side here.
They came to a "funding agreement", did they? And how much did that agreement provide to build a wall?
The rest is simply statements of opinion; opinion that is based on hatred of Trump rather than factual reality. The same as the Democratic party, then; if Trump wants it then refuse it without regard to necessity, usefulness, cost or anything else.
Well, since the Republicans approved the same funding bill as the Democrats, does that mean they also " refuse it [the wall] without regard to necessity, usefulness, cost or anything else"?
And, I still haven't seen a convincing demonstration of "necessity, usefulness, cost or anything else." Does it exist?
The reason for a wall is because we have tried all else and nothing have worked...in 30 plus years.
We would be not having this discussion in 2019 if any of the other stuff has worked would we? Not eVerify, not drones, not more border agents, not war on drugs, not electronic sensors...
If walls don’t work, then I guess that is our fate.
"And how much did that agreement provide to build a wall?"
Was there a reason you declined to answer the question? Why did you change the topic to something else (republican complicity) rather than stick to the topic (democratic funding of the wall)?
You can start here for reasons to build a wall: https://www.bizpacreview.com/2019/01/07 … pHOy6I6nd4
Here's another one: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FT7c7wUktmg
Of course, it requires an honest assessment of the problem of illegal aliens and it requires an honest assessment of the Israeli minister. As neither is mud to sling at Trump that could be a problem.
Lol, what is there to address? Obviously, neither Republicans nor Democrats nor the majority of Americans want a wall.
I will look at your links.
How is that obvious?
It is obvious only to people who hasn’t been paying attention and only get their news from the biased CNN or MSNBC...or the NYT...
Unlike the "fair and balanced" sources you watch, Jack! You're a hoot!
It would be good for all here to go back and study the history of immigration starting at 1985...the last amnesty...
Offered by Reagan...
With eash passing year, the problem grew and all politicians said the right things but did very little...
It got to here because of people like Kate Steinle and so many other senseless deaths...
It got here because people like Pelosi and Schumer and their hypocrisy...
It has to stop and the wall is the last straw...
I love it when Jack makes a statement that's completely opposite of the actual facts such as "with each passing year, the problem grew...."
In actuality, in 2016, the amount of undocumented immigrants was the lowest it had been since 2004. The 10.7 million represents just 3.3% of the total US population (325 million). That is a 13% decline since 2007, so to say the problem grew is another lie devoid of any factual basis.
Additionally, as of 2016, two thirds of unauthorized immigrant adults had been in the United States for more than ten years.
Really, if that is true...why are we even discussing this. It is your experience that we have no problem with border security.
These people dying of drug overdose just happens...
The human trafficking that goes on is much less...
The people standing around corners in some towns in the suburbs are just my imagination...
The workers at fast foods, and lanscapes are teenagers like when I was growing up...
What are you saying? Exactly.
If we can’t agree on the problem or even if there is a problem, then we have a bigger problem at out hands.
We have people that just refuse to see reality.
What will it take to wake you up?
What if your daughter ended up like Kate Steinle God forbid?
Would that change your mind?
Really? Did I say there were not issues with border security anywhere in that post? Or are you spewing more falsehoods in denial of actual facts that showed that the issue was improving by nearly 15% since 2007.
The rhetoric you believe does not mention these facts. In fact, you are convinced the problem has been getting worse even though I have just shown you data that proves things have been improving. Who truly needs to wake up and accept the reality of what's been happening?
Honestly, I'm more worried about our children ending up like Charlotte Bacon, Luke Hoyer, or Lance Kirkland. I accept that there will be occasional crime among any population and, unlike you, don't racially stereotype an entire population based on the few instances that appear in the media.
I don’t stereotype. You are trying to make it into it.
I merely state the facts. Apparently you reject.
If we close the borders years ago, do you think Kate Steinle will be alive today?
If we did not have this insane santuary city policy? Do you think things might turn out different?
These are real people.
I reject the logic that says these immigrants as a whole commit less crime than Americans...
That is beside the point.
Even if one person died as a result, it is so tragic and unnecessary.
These are things we have control over. The crime commited by Americans we have little control over. That is statistics.
Why would we want to add to this with illegals coming here with added crimes of drugs and other felonies...
Here is projection of population...
If things are getting better, how would you know it?
So you're stating one can see things are worse by the number of Hispanic births increasing?
Not just birth...plus immigration...which is what we are discussing...no?
What are you implying?
Jack, You always complain that I consistently "play the race card", with your reasoning on this topic, it is the only card in the deck left to play. What do you think that you have been implying with your right wing generated stats?
Also, facts support less crime committed by immigrants than by comparable domestic populations, so why this "Exorcist" play turning your head a 180 to avoid factual data that is right before you.
Yes, I boldly tell the American Right that the Demographics in America are changing , whether they like or like it not. Hispanic birth rates are higher so to attempt to staunch the flow at one end is useless as it still runs at the other. For the Rightwinger, it is an exercise in futility as a Democrat political majority is in the wings.
Yep, not only that.
The fertility rate in the U.S. has hit a 30-year low, and Americans are not having enough babies to replace themselves, according to a new report from the federal government.
A report published Thursday by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) titled "National Vital Statistics" found that the country’s fertility rate in 2017 was 16 percent below the level needed for a population to replace itself.
Utah and New Mexico are the only two states in the country with total fertility rates above replacement levels, the report found.
When broken down by race, the results show that non-Hispanic white women do not have fertility rates above replacement level in any states
Black women had fertility rates above replacement level in 12 states, as did Hispanic women in 29 states, according to the report.
The U.S. fertility rate has been dropping for years and women are generally having babies later in life, the CDC found.
I guess immigrants are needed more than just for their work.
IB, thanks, this is a case in point. Perhaps instead of pining for a past that can never again be realized, we should work with the current trends toward the most advantageous outcome for all.
As I understood, until the violent militancy of the Islamic groups, Germany had a reputation for graciously accepting immigrants and it was not all altruistic either. Their population as true for many European nations were not replacing themselves. So, they bring others in and train them in gainful employment skills, thus helping to maintain the social service base the older residents needed to rely on.
With the appropriate attitude, anything is possible
Yes they are changing credence but how? That is the question...
I said it is not because of race and I mean that. If the same thing was happening on our Northern border, I would feel the same.
Do you get that?
So it is not about the fact Mexicans and south And central Americans are coming in droves.
It is about undocumented people coming here without any vetting or check of medical status...
It is about people coming here taking low paying jobs...keeping wages suppressed for American citizens...
It is about drug traffickers using mules to transport illegal drugs that devastate our community....
I posted this chart to illustrate the change in demographics is not only due to a high birth rate. Do you deny that?
Therefore, the rising rate is due to both a higher rate and a higher illegal entry? No? Over the past 30 years and more...
How does a group go from negligible percent to 18%?
This Pew Research Center Report may help, that is if you have nothing against this source?
http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/20 … -changing/
It seems to point to the percentage of Hispanic that are immigrants, foreign born as falling, while the percentage of those born here rises. Their average age is increasing and the fertility of their women waning, but simply not the extent of other groups. I don't see anything that supports a massive influx of Hispanics into the US to the magnitude of these vast demographic changes solely based on ILLEGAL immigration.....
Credence, does it bother you that hispanic is surpassing Blacks in numbers?
By the way, the article points out Asian are the fastest growing population even faster than hispanics.
Some of that is also due to illegal entry...
I am Asian and I am still against that as well.
When it comes to immigration, I am color blind. I look at whether they come here legally or not.
I want to stop all illegal part and I want to improve the legal immigration process. Right now, we are stuck in a perpetual broken state. Nothing is being done on any front.
"Credence, does it bother you that hispanic is surpassing Blacks in numbers? "
Just wondering, why should it bother anyone?
Because many of his people are competing for those same jobs...and there by keeping those wages low.
Let me put it another way, if those people did not come here, the job of a roofer would pay perhaps $25 an hour instead of $15.
The cashier at your local McDonalds will get $12 an hour instead of minimum wage. In addition, his teenager will have a P/T job saving for college...
I use this as a simple example but it is true across the board.
When you have more of something, the cost gets cheaper.
The law of supply and demand.
When there is more available labor force, the cost of hiring them goes down.
Didn't you hear Jack, there's a dearth of needed employees at the moment?
I believe that it is simplistic to say that undocumented immigrants are competing with American citizens for employment in the same way.
There are many factors contributing to wage stagnation part of that being the fault of the Capitalist class, its outsourcing and automation, and much of that cannot be helped as part of our economic system. But,these same "captains of industry" illegally use this labor in defiance of immigration laws. Addressing this is an aspect of the "comprehensive" solution to the problem that seems to elude us.
So, don't be surprised if I am not quick to place the blame solely on the man or family climbing over the fence.
So, I blame the greedy Capitalist before I blame the undocumented migrant.
Well, it is the greedy capitalist that created all the comforts of our society. Where do you think the gas in your car come from? The medical devices that safe lives, the electricity that power your home, the phone you use to communicate, the computer you use to send messages and email and post on Hubpages...?
You are placing the blame on the wrong part. The blame rest on our government, not the private companies and not the immigrants...
They just want a better life as you and I would.
The problem is our government that allow it to happen. It is their job to keep our borders safe. They have not done their job...hence, we are where we are.
Without these companies and the men and women that created them, our lives would be like Cuba and Venezuela.
I feel like I am talking to kindergarden kids...who are clueless...
Now you're getting it, Jack! Do you believe you come off as a mature adult with your posts? You parrot the talking head Limbaugh and expect to be taken seriously? Seriously?
You're in for a long fall, Jack. You're promoting a conman who'll be proven to have betrayed his country before it's all over. You'll never recover from this, Jack. No one will ever take your opinion seriously again if it has to do with politics.
Someone said, "Once the stench of Trump gets on you, it never goes away."
Here is another article you might enjoy reading...
https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/20 … _trap.html
Maybe the shut down is exactly what the country needed...
An excerpt -
“ On an average day, roughly 15 percent of the employees around me are exceptional patriots serving their country. I wish I could give competitive salaries to them and no one else. But 80 percent feel no pressure to produce results. If they don’t feel like doing what they are told, they don’t.
Why would they? We can’t fire them. They avoid attention, plan their weekend, schedule vacation, their second job, their next position — some do this in the same position for more than a decade.
They do nothing that warrants punishment and nothing of external value. That is their workday: errands for the sake of errands — administering, refining, following and collaborating on process. “Process is your friend” is what delusional civil servants tell themselves. Even senior officials must gain approval from every rank across their department, other agencies and work units for basic administrative chores.“
Now it all begins to make sense -
Remember this article?
https://conservativedailypost.com/lefti … esistance/
That article was pure Rightwinger propaganda and a mean swipe at working people from a vicious American rightwing. Total rubbish, Jack.
So, one rightwing cretin has got you duped in believing that his account of the Federal workforce is the "rule". This to justify the hardship these employees are experiencing as part of this shutdown, ameliorating it, so that everyone thinks that they deserve it?
I resent the accusations as more rightwing bulls@it. As he and indirectly, you, are saying that my 33 years as a civil servant constitutes a waste of taxpayers money.
All major bureaucracies work in the same way, IBM is no different.
No that is just it. They don’t work the same. When IBM faced hard times, they layoff workers. When government is out of money, they raise taxes or worse, print money they don’t have... that is a huge difference.
Credence, checkout my latest hub...
Alright, Jack, I will have a look if I can find it. But I will say this, you are quite prolific with your writings, too bad we are not on the same side on so many issues.
Creating all the comforts and being greedy bastards are not necessarily mutually exclusive.
Like any animal there are benifits, but there is effluent as well that have to be dealt with.
The problem is that it is hard to find or see daylight between the Government and the Corporate class, perhaps that is why we areso slow to the address the immigration problems from the standpoint of their part of the blame,
This class has an inordinate influence in how Government actually operates and serve the masses.
"Credence, does it bother you that hispanic is surpassing Blacks in numbers?"
Interesting question, Jack.
Quite the contrary, I am elated by the growth of Hispanic populations here. I see them as political bedfellows and brothers in arms in the struggle to make America a more just and equitable society. Why would I be intimidated by that?
You have read my article on the subject of illegal immigration and I have stated that I am no advocate of it. I have not presented resistance to a COMPREHENSIVE plan to deal with the issue, in all its aspects.
Be it Asian, Black, Hispanic or Alaskan Inuit, the more diversity, the better I like it and the more comfortable I become.
I just believe that building a wall may not be the best use of resources to stem the tide or whether it can be considered draconian based on what everyone seems to say that the problem is not what it once was.
By that logic, you would be perfectly fine if 1 million Buddhists came over, or a few million South Africans... you know they are being persecuted by the new Black leaders there...
Or a few million muslim jahadist?
Where do you draw the line? If there is any line?
Even if you are ok with it, do you know what impact it will have on our country? Our laws, our customs, our culture and most important - our Constitutional government.
You see, these are nice people but they have no idea of what a democracy is or what it entails?
How will they assimilate assuming they want to assimilate?
And the impact on jobs?
You have to think this over...my friend.
We are a nation of immigrants right?
But this nation did so over a period of a few hundred years.
At best, we have a million or so legal immigrants a year entering our country.
Why do you suppose the INS rule tha you need to wait 5 years after your green card before applying for citizenship?
Why not just give them all citizens right away?
So many questions...
Yes, indeed a lot of questions
For the most part people who immigrate legally here agree to assimilate. There is the democratic rule of law and the capitalist economic system they all sign into. That is why I stamp out instances of anyone applying Sharia Law anywhere in America as our legal system is based on English Common Law.
No need to get draconian, Jack, the whole world is not invited to legally immigrate and there will be no "bum rush" of the border.
I have no problem with the INS rules and procedures to vet applicants and such. The filtration system in place will keep the undesirables away. We survived Ellis Island, when everyone 120 years ago felt that the undesirables arriving from Southern Europe would undermine American society. So, as a historian, I have heard the refrain before and I believe we will survive the influx today.
What I don't want is an Anglo hegemony with no other voices in the mix, and will work toward diluting that. Our immigration policy reflected that attitude until as late as 1965.
What were you implying with the population graph?
I am saying if the illegal immigration problem is getting better, how do you explain the projected growth of hispanics here?
It is projected to rise much faster than just higher birth rate.
There are only a few possibilities.
Either more illegals are coming here, or the ones here legally are getting more family members to come here...chain migration, or more legal immigrants are coming from countries in our south or a combination of all three. Yes?
What am I missing?
Thank you for proving my case about your xenophobia. I won't even go so far as calling it racism, but others might see it that way. Your complete lack of acceptance of factual based evidence about the issue just makes you sound brainwashed.
If we closed the border, would Kate Steinle be alive? What kind of logic is that? Hey, Jack, if we closed the borders a hundred years earlier, do you think Martin Luther King Jr. might be alive too?
Crime by Americans is fine with you, but crime by immigrants from Mexico is abhorrent? That is so racially charged it's not even funny any longer. I seriously think you may want to take a break from posting on here for a while.
Okay, well, an honest assessment of the information provided by the links is that it isn't much help at all in determining whether or not a wall would be effective on our southern border. The Israeli wall is nothing like the steel-slat wall that Trump has described, and there is no information at all provided about cost versus effectiveness of Trump's proposed wall.
What if the shut down worked and he got what he wanted?
Does he still own it?
by IslandBites 4 weeks ago
SMH 3 days!https://www.gofundme.com/TheTrumpWall?f … M-yBq2Hhnc We The People Will Fund The WallLike a majority of those American citizens who voted to elect President Donald J Trump, we voted for him to Make America Great Again. President Trump’s main campaign promise was to BUILD...
by PrettyPanther 3 hours ago
Calling it "a great thing to do," President Trump declared a national emergency on Friday in order to help finance a long-promised wall on the U.S.-Mexico border. It's a highly unusual move from an unconventional president.In circuitous remarks in the Rose Garden, Trump said he was...
by Kathryn L Hill 3 weeks ago
http://fortune.com/2016/04/17/immigration-open-borders/ How about it?Tearing down the wall, would be a better solution?
by Scott Belford 2 weeks ago
1 - Roger Stone, long-time Trump adviser, confidant, and conspiracy theorist was indicted by Robert Mueller in his Russian probe. The most interesting, conspiracy related sentence in the indictment is "After the July 22, 2016 release of stolen DNC emails by (WikiLeaks), a...
by Annsalo 2 years ago
Do you think Trumps "plan" he released for funding the wall is possible?While I am not a Trump fan I do think we need something done about illegal immigration. Trump released his plan and part of it included stopping wire transfers to Mexicans. Since it is commonly known Mexican illegal...
by AnnCee 8 years ago
These will include an unmanned drone for the Texas border and permission for law enforcement outside the border area to deploy to the border temporarily.President Obama will also be less of a jerk and meet with Governor Jan Brewer later this month.I guess Senator Kyl's revelation that Barack Obama...
Copyright © 2019 HubPages Inc. and respective owners. Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners. HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc. HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.
|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|